Isn't it ironic that the young, vicious 'liberal' who celebrates Thatcher's death would probably be a lot less violent if he or she was spanked as a kid

Should we celebrate the death of the anti-Thatcher protestors? The short answer is: No. Why? For one, it’s not who we as conservatives and responsible citizens are. Far too often these days, however, it is an increasing number on the left, and especially the young left, that fall into this category.

We on the right may disagree vehemently with our political opponents but we do not wish them dead, nor do we ‘celebrate’ their death. Not least, for the sake of the loved ones they have left behind. Why then is celebrating, even calling for the deaths of political opponents, becoming an increasing trait of leftism?

The fact is that the vicious bile emanating from the largely student-led anti-Thatcher protestors shocked even many of Margaret Thatcher’s political detractors. There is a sheer sickness of mind that afflicts a significant element of the hard left. If they were mature enough to look at themselves for just a moment, they would see what Joe Average sees: their rage transcends mere hatred becoming something darkly evil.

The trouble is of course that the ‘student’ left has no experience of life. They have yet to contribute anything to life. Not without reason did AJP Taylor (a lifelong socialist by the way) pen, “It’s a sure sign of political backwardness when any movement is led by students.” Another oft-quoted dictum (which may or may not have been said by Churchill) has it: “If you’re not a liberal at twenty-five you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative at thirty-five you have no brain.” Fair enough.

On the whole, as most of us remember only too well, we tend to hold vastly different views at 40 than we did at 20. The implication of all this wisdom of course is that, on the whole, to be young is to display immaturity. Thus the predilection of the young to support the left is also just that: immature.

So what of the vastly ramped-up vitriol inherent in the burning of effigies of Margaret Thatcher by the National Union of Students in Bristol among others? It provides a fascinating insight into a bunch of (to use a Wogan expression) numpteys who were not even born when Maggie came to power. Neither have they any concept of the perilous state of the British economy and what that meant for increasing poverty in the 1970s before she did: a situation inflicted on Britain by socialist policies, the very policies that the anti-Thatcher protestors now advocate. Yet they can, quite literally, burn with hatred for any who disagree with them.

Of course, what has significantly changed our social landscape since the 60s baby boomers came to power, with their post-Christian sense of liberalising amorality, is the increasing refusal to discipline children. In the leftist scheme of things parents and teachers can only offer the carrot – the stick having been taken away. Put simply, spanking children has become a thing of the past (as if, somehow human nature has changed).

These days, leftist charities like the NSPCC spend millions in donations on campaigning for government to stop parents administering physical chastisement. It is no surprise then that recent generations have grown up with ever-reducing levels of discipline where authority is automatically despised and where leftist liberalism and indiscipline fuse into what we see today: increasingly anarchic, unreasoned views whose advocates seek the blood of those who have the temerity to disagree.

Related

Not that indiscipline affects only the left; there are the occasional right wing nut-jobs out there. That includes those who threaten and sometimes shoot abortion clinic practitioners. There are the private US militias and Timothy McVeigh’s who blow up government facilities and workers. But their activities are nothing like as endemic in culture and society as the daily and menacing bile dripping from rage-filled lips on the ‘Occupy’ anti-capitalist left.

Spanking liberals

A couple of years ago I took an interest (and wrote about) how a Massachusetts nurse brought a bill before the US state court aimed at banning spanking. Prior to the court hearing (the Bill ultimately failed) Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly interviewed child psychologist and liberal activist, Dr. Theresa Whitehurst, author of How Would Jesus Raise Your Child? To my amazement she asserted the theory that not only was spanking an abuse of children's rights but it was also anti-Christian. Well, I have to tell you, as a long-time teacher on matters biblical, I almost choked on my cereal.

This is no place for a sermon but invoking the Bible on child discipline isn’t gonna cut much ice with those who know their Bible. “Spare the rod and spoil the child” is just one of hundreds of references that hammer home how essential it is that children must be disciplined, including occasional physical chastisement for both their own and for society’s greater good.

The reason is simple enough. The Bible recognizes that in the real world children are born grasping, greedy and self-obsessed. Unless they are taught differently, they will grow up that way too. And therein lies the clue to the current malaise of ‘we want those who disagree with us’ leftist street anarchy.

So if you’ve ever wondered why it is that the liberal left, especially the young, has grown even more vicious in ‘blood-seeking’ rhetoric, there it is. Ironic, is it not, that we’d have been spared a whole mess of leftist bile if only their parents had spanked them as kids?

Peter C Glover is the author of The Politics of Faith and a contributing editor at The Commentator . For more go to www.petercglover.com